[#3419] Valgrind analysis of [BUG] unknown node type 0 — Andrew Walrond <andrew@...>

Hello list,

19 messages 2004/09/17
[#3422] Re: Valgrind analysis of [BUG] unknown node type 0 — ts <decoux@...> 2004/09/17

>>>>> "A" == Andrew Walrond <andrew@walrond.org> writes:

[#3423] Re: Valgrind analysis of [BUG] unknown node type 0 — Andrew Walrond <andrew@...> 2004/09/17

On Friday 17 Sep 2004 12:01, ts wrote:

[#3424] Re: Valgrind analysis of [BUG] unknown node type 0 — ts <decoux@...> 2004/09/17

>>>>> "A" == Andrew Walrond <andrew@walrond.org> writes:

[#3425] Re: Valgrind analysis of [BUG] unknown node type 0 — Andrew Walrond <andrew@...> 2004/09/17

On Friday 17 Sep 2004 12:37, ts wrote:

[#3426] Re: Valgrind analysis of [BUG] unknown node type 0 — ts <decoux@...> 2004/09/17

>>>>> "A" == Andrew Walrond <andrew@walrond.org> writes:

[#3428] Re: Valgrind analysis of [BUG] unknown node type 0 — Andrew Walrond <andrew@...> 2004/09/17

On Friday 17 Sep 2004 13:05, ts wrote:

[#3429] Re: Valgrind analysis of [BUG] unknown node type 0 — ts <decoux@...> 2004/09/17

>>>>> "A" == Andrew Walrond <andrew@walrond.org> writes:

Re: "destructiveness" of delete

From: matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto)
Date: 2004-09-01 09:26:08 UTC
List: ruby-core #3336
Hi,

In message ""destructiveness" of delete"
    on 04/08/31, "David A. Black" <dblack@wobblini.net> writes:

|I know there's no Array#delete! because "delete" already
|implies in-place change.  But I recently noticed that
|there is a String#delete! as well as String#delete.  Just
|wondering why, or whether these behaviors will be unified.

Just because they are different, probably they had different origins
that unfortunately slept away from my brain.  I didn't feel strings
and arrays were similar no more than they both had [] and each,
and I still don't.

							matz.

In This Thread